Simply put, a squash obstacle occurs when one player gets in the way of the other or the ball. Detached, league and team squash generally perform very well at my (weak) level. What level do you play here? The player who hits gets the point when the opponent blocks and he can hit the ball. The reason for this is to respect the principle of security. If the rules did not dictate punishment to the opponent in this case, things would get even worse. Striking players would need body contact (e.g. pushing) to get the ball, making it dangerous. And again, squash is played in such a small space that they can`t afford to play hard. It has been said that blocking is the art of creating an obstacle without giving the appearance. It can take the form of a slow movement to lighten, a deliberate swing in the movement of the body, a carelessly outstretched arm, a wrong direction to clarify, a slow foot, a follow-up held too long, etc.
The purpose of these actions is to prevent the incoming attacker from quickly accessing the ball in the hope that the blocker`s shot will win, or that you, the referee, in the worst case for the blocker, will give permission to the attacker who arrives. Essentially, the “blocker” is trying to have the best of both worlds. Of course, we should note that not all similar game interruptions are due to intentional blocking – as many occur through sheer incompetence. Since two players are locked in a common room, disruption and handicap in squash are inevitable. In general, the rules allow players to direct access to the ball in order to achieve a reasonable swing as well as unhindered shots on each part of the front wall. If a malfunction occurs, a player can request permission and the referee or the player himself (if there is no referee) will then interpret the extent of the interference. As a rule, after a shot, the outgoing player begins to clear (legitimate – do not block, as described in the first paragraph of this article) to allow the arriving attacker to enter – but then this escape (exit) is trapped. Catching it can take the form of a direct “brick wall or bear hug” barrier, bumping shoulders, a simple “hand on back” type contact by the incoming attacker moving to reach the ball. As a rule, the incoming attacker tries to avoid any serious contact. (Again, we assume this is a legitimate catch — not a case where the incoming attacker “creates” an artificial disturbance to fish a shot — a concept covered in another article.) The contact here is enough to interrupt the match and make the referee understand that a let is called.
In any case, it often seems bad for the open-minded player, as everyone is crammed when that player is stuck there – often with the ball returned to both players. Get a good referral who is aware of the blockage and doesn`t hesitate to report it. Quite rare if you play at club or regional level. There`s one group I wouldn`t get angry with if I blocked them, and that`s the ones that haven`t played very long, like maybe a year or two. Reason: One of the first things you are taught in squash is “go to the T” and many of these players take this to heart that they are almost ready to support you to get there after their shot. Not quite right, but they are not aware that all this is a proper space rule instead of “I`m in the middle, so I`m right” If the ball is hit by a squash player and hits his opponent before hitting the front wall, the ball has been stopped and the ball will die. Finally, one last thing, to answer a frequently asked question, there is no authorization in the rules in case such a situation recurs repeatedly. Just because a player`s shooting choice leads to the same scenarios over and over again, each situation must be judged on its own merits. A player cannot be penalized for selecting moves. If a penalty is due, it must be due for the next act.
Semantics The most common use of the term “blocking” used by referees and players is not explicitly mentioned in the rules. Its current usage generally refers to a criminal action of the outgoing player (which we will call the “blocker”) whose compensation action is intentionally erroneous. In an article by David Donelly, the former head of the WSF Rules Subcommittee, he makes it clear that “blocking is the art of creating an obstacle without giving it the appearance of it.” This can take the form: the referee plays an important role in dealing with disturbances, as he must observe, evaluate and judge quickly. First, the referee must ensure that a player actually requests a release. If they do not know why a rental is requested, they will ask for clarification. In order to respect the basic principles of squash, the referee may stop the rally for safety reasons. Curiously, blocking is not used in the squash rules defined by the FSM, but exists as a form of interference. Since we know that there are more scenarios where a block can occur, let`s look at the specific forms of disruption according to squash rules and how this affects our blocking question (no pun intended). So okay, blocking is a, I agree. But tackling the problem is too difficult because there is no sure way to do it. What has been described above are interpretations that, in my view, are based on rules.
However, for the sake of thought, I will ask a few questions about possible additional considerations that some would like to include in the Rules of Procedure – considerations which, by virtue of their provisions, would lead to the decision one way or the other. It is obvious that the more factors an arbitrator is allowed to consider, the easier the decision will be. Here are some of them: What to do? Here`s what an important rule guideline suggests for deciding the fair outcome: The PSA lease to give more no-lets on the basis that players should be able to make adjustments to bypass their opponent to play the ball didn`t translate into a league game, as far as I know. Most of my opponents (and refs) are from a generation where punches and let are given very freely, so the blocking problem is almost non-existent. So, have we simply unlocked our blocking question? I would say we did! If the referee decides that there has been no disturbance or fear of injury, he will not grant permission, but will grant the gathering to the other player. The same applies if the player hitting does not return the ball correctly, although there have been disturbances due to blocking, for example. Other scenarios where no running is allowed, including if there are problems but the batting player would still be able to return the ball or if the ball is not requested immediately. The most common of all “trapping” incidents is a very common situation that every experienced referee has seen thousands of times.
I believe that this is the only principle, the most frequently applied in the Rules of Procedure, which, as has already been mentioned, is found in the first paragraph of Directive 6.
